It submits that, although originally in Pennsylvania a defendant who escaped custody was held to have forfeited his right to a full appellate review, the Supreme Court of this state has recently departed from this position, holding that a fugitive should be allowed to exercise his post-trial rights in the same manner as he would have done had he not become a fugitive.
Sostiene que, si bien antes en Pensilvania se consideraba que un procesado que se fugaba perdía su derecho a una plena revisión, el Tribunal Supremo de ese Estado ha abandonado recientemente esa posición y sostiene ahora que se debe permitir que el fugitivo ejerza sus derechos después del juicio de la misma forma que lo habría hecho de no haberse fugado.